When does Nettie come into contact with American prejudice in Alice Walker's The Color Purple?

Nettie comes into contact with American prejudice when she takes the train to New York. In her letter to Celie, she explains the train had a restaurant and berths above the seats, but only white passengers could use the berths and the restaurant. Nettie, Samuel, Corinne, and the children had to content themselves with the "sit-down section of the train." The toilets were also segregated; Caucasians and African-Americans had to use separate ones.

Nettie writes that she encountered one other instance of American prejudice when she conversed with a white passenger from South Carolina. He asked her where she and her friends were headed, and Nettie answered they were going to Africa. The man found that information simultaneously humorous and offensive. He then made a denigrating comment to his wife about black people going to Africa.

Later, when Nettie met a representative from the Missionary Society of New York, she got the distinct impression from him that African-American missionaries like her could never be as successful in Africa as someone he knows: a fellow white missionary worker who "doesn't 'coddle' her charges" while she works with them.

What is the topic of the first sermon Mr. Hooper gives while wearing the veil?

The subject of Mr. Hooper's first sermon after he begins to wear the veil is actually somewhat of an explanation of the symbolism behind the veil.  Its subject was

[...] secret sin, and those sad mysteries which we hide from our nearest and dearest, and would fain conceal from our own consciousness, even forgetting that the Omniscient can detect them.

In other words, Mr. Hooper preaches about those secret sins that each of us commits and feels compelled to hide from even those people that we are closest to.  We would also like to be able to put our secret sins out of our own minds, and we can even delude ourselves into believing that God isn't aware of them because we are so anxious to forget (and hide) them.

This is, essentially, the truth about humanity that is represented by the veil.  Mr. Hooper believes that each of us is secretly sinful and that we all attempt to hide that truth from everyone else by holding up a figurative veil between ourselves and them.  He wears the literal veil as a symbol of this unseen veil that he believes we all wear. 

What reasons does Crooks first give for not welcoming Lennie into his room in Of Mice and Men?

Crooks is the black stable buck in John Steinbeck's novella Of Mice and Men. Because he is a black man living on an all white ranch in the 1930's he is a victim of both racism and segregation. He is rarely welcomed into the bunkhouse where the white workers live. Candy describes one time when Crooks was invited into the bunkhouse and, because of his color, is involved in a fight. Candy says in chapter two,

"They let the nigger come in that night. Little skinner name of Smitty took after the nigger. Done pretty good, too. The guys wouldn’t let him use his feet, so the nigger got him. If he coulda used his feet, Smitty says he woulda killed the nigger. The guys said on account of the nigger’s got a crooked back, Smitty can’t use his feet.”

Crooks lives in a private room in the barn and when Lennie, who is lonely because George has gone into town, tries to enter, the black man becomes defensive. He tells Lennie that it is not fair for the big man to come into his room because he is not welcomed in the bunkhouse where Lennie lives. When Lennie asks why he is not wanted Crooks says,

“’Cause I’m black. They play cards in there, but I can’t play because I’m black. They say I stink. Well, I tell you, you all of you stink to me.” 

Lennie, of course, doesn't really understand this. He has no awareness of racism. For Lennie, Crooks is just another man on the ranch. He sees Crooks's light and wants the companionship. He doesn't know it's bad to socialize with a black man.

Studies have shown that the demand for tobacco tends to be highly price inelastic. Evaluate the view that government can best reduce smoking by...

When a good or service is highly price inelastic, its demand will stay high no matter how expensive it is (within reason). If a government raises taxes on a particular good, that tax will be passed on to the consumer, meaning it will become more expensive. In this case, because cigarettes are bad for us, increasing spending on healthcare among other social costs, governments might try to limit smoking by putting a large tax on tobacco, which would make cigarettes so expensive that many smokers might quit because they are no longer able to afford to buy cigarettes. The fact that tobacco is price inelastic suggests that this approach will be of limited effectiveness. Cigarettes are highly addictive, and people will continue to buy them (again, within reason) even if they are very expensive. This does not mean a government should not tax cigarettes--in fact, it might mean that cigarettes could become an important source of revenue. It simply means that taxation with the purpose of curbing smoking may not be as effective as planned. 

Can someone explain molecular formulas to me?

A molecular formula indicates, with subscripts, the number of atoms of each element in one molecule of a compound. In comparison, the empirical formula gives the simplest whole number ratio of atoms in a molecule. As an example, the molecular formula for glucose is `C_6H_12O_6` . This means that each molecuse of glucose is made up of six carbon atoms, twelve oxygen atoms and six hydrogen atoms. The empirical formula for glucose is `CH_2O` . This shows that the ratio of carbon to hydrogen to oxygen is 1:2:1, but doesn't provide any more information about the molecule.

The molecular formula is a whole-number multiple of the empiricial formula. It's possible for that whole number to be one and the two formulas to be the same, for example methane has the molecular formula `CH_4` which is also the simplest or empirical formula.

The empirical formula can be determined from the percent composition or mass composition of a compound, and the molecular formula then be determined if the empI rival formula is known. For example, if you just knew the empirical formula for glucose and that it's molar mass is 180 g/mol, you would divide 180 by the molar mass of the empirical formula, 30. This gives the whole number 6, so the molecular formula is 6(`CH_2O` ) or `C_6H_12O_6` .

In Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, how is Tybalt responsible for Romeo and Juliet's deaths?

Tybalt is responsible for Romeo and Juliet’s deaths because his insistence on fighting Romeo is what got Romeo banished and led to his suicide.

Tybalt was so caught up in his family feud that he did not think about the consequences. He tried to fight Romeo originally at the party, and then caught up with him again later on the street.  Romeo was not interested in fighting. He also considered Tybalt family.

TYBALT

Romeo, the hate I bear thee can afford
No better term than this,--thou art a villain.

ROMEO

Tybalt, the reason that I have to love thee
Doth much excuse the appertaining rage
To such a greeting: villain am I none;
Therefore farewell; I see thou know'st me not. (Act 3, Scene 1)

Mercutio tried to protect Romeo, and Tybalt ended up fighting him.  He could have just forgotten the whole thing when it was clear that Romeo would not fight.  Mercutio was at the party too.  The idea was to eliminate the Montagues or punish the Montagues.  Tybalt paid with his life for his insistence on maintaining the feud.

Unfortunately, after Tybalt killed Mercutio, Romeo had to step in.  He killed Tybalt, and found himself banished.  It was this banishment that led Juliet to fake her death, and this fake death is that which caused Romeo to commit suicide.  He returned from banishment to find Juliet supposedly lying dead.  Unable to accept that, he killed himself.  Juliet then awoke and killed herself.  Thus, Tybalt was directly or indirectly responsible for his own death and the deaths of Mercutio, Romeo, and Juliet.

Only as the story progresses do you learn something of what has happened outside the McClellan home. What effect do you think this delay creates?

By not telling his readers what has happened to the people and society at the beginning of the story, “There Will Come Soft Rains”, Bradbury is building suspense and mystery.  It’s a wonderful technique to get the reader interested and excited to read for deeper meaning and to find clues and connections to what is really going on in the story.  The vacant house full of technology and gadgets to serve the inhabitants of the house continues to beep, make breakfast, and play the owners’ favorite tunes.  The fact that there is no one there to enjoy this easy lifestyle adds confusion to the story.  The story slowly unfolds for the pleasure of the reader, and when it is finally revealed that a nuclear war has occurred, the reader is able to piece together all the context clues and have a satisfying reading experience. 

Should we celebrate Christopher Columbus Day? Why or why not?

This, of course, is a matter of opinion, and I will answer it by explaining both sides of the controversy.

Many who support Columbus Day as a holiday support the traditional view that Columbus's voyages made a New World possible. By his "discovery" of the Americas, Columbus ushered in a new era that, the holiday's supporters argue, culminated with the establishment of the United States of America. Whatever tragic elements the story of Columbus may have, his is also a story of human daring, enterprise, and "can-do" spirit that many identify with the American way of life even though Columbus lived and died almost three centuries before the establish of the United States. Columbus was also, of course, Italian, and the holiday had its origins as a celebration of Italian-American heritage at a time when Italian immigrants faced discrimination. It still is for many people, and for that reason should be celebrated, in the same way that Irish-Americans celebrate St. Patrick's Day. 

Opponents of Columbus Day argue that he is not an individual to be celebrated. Rather, contact between Columbus and Native Americans ushered in one of the great tragedies in human history. Columbus himself brutally exploited Indian peoples, and the process begun by Columbus culminated with the virtual annihilation of Native peoples. To celebrate Columbus is to celebrate the destruction of these peoples. Of course, many of the most active opponents of the holiday are Native Americans, and some argue that the holiday should be a celebration, or better yet a memorial, of Indian peoples, who were here before Columbus. 

What were the conflicts between Ralph and Jack in Lord of the Flies?

The initial conflict between Jack and Ralph was over who should be chief. Jack had believed that he should be chief because he was on the chapel choir and was a head boy with other accomplishments. The group of boys though voted for Ralph because he had greater presence than Jack and he had convened them with the conch - a shell that could be blown loudly and which was to later become coveted as an authority symbol.

As they lived on the island other conflicts between the two would arise, Ralph chastised Jack for not paying attention to the fire. The fire was supposed to be the means by which ships would notice the boys and come and rescue them. Jack on the other hand was more intent on hunting. So they had different priorities. Ralph wanted to get off the island; Jack was focused on surviving on the island.

The conflict over who should be chief reemerged as the enmity between the two boys grew. Eventually the boys split up into two tribes with some following Jack and some following Ralph.

Is Lennie's death considered euthanasia, some form of death penalty?

Because Lennie's death is a "mercy killing" enacted consciously by George, it would be considered murder. However, since no one witnessed what has happened, George claims that he shot the gun in self-defense after getting it away from Lennie, who was going to shoot him.

The truth, of course, is that George has intentionally killed Lennie. However, he has shot Lennie in the same way that one would shoot an animal that is ill or dying or crazed; in other words, a mercy killing. George knows that poor Lennie could not bear being put into a cell, nor could he survive amid prisoners without any help from George, and George is powerless to help Lennie. Certainly, Lennie would be in despair if he were put into a mental asylum instead of a prison. 

This ending for Lennie has been foreshadowed with the death of Candy's dog sand with Lennie's having been associated with an animal in the initial character description of his lumbering behind George as they entered the clearing; Lennie, with

...sloping shoulders...walked heavily, dragging his feet a little, the way a bear drags his paws. 

George does not want to kill Lennie, but he knows the alternatives for his friend, and he cannot bear for Lennie to be confined in prison.

Lennie was in possession of Carlson's gun and he pointed it at George. He intimates to Carlson, who asks him what happened 

In "The Adventures of the Speckled Band," why is Dr.Watson free to tell this story, which he had promised to keep secret?

Dr. Watson was a historian of sorts of Sherlock Holmes.  He chronicled “seventy odd cases” that were solved by the consulting detective before he wrote this one.  Holmes knew that Watson, who was his best friend, was writing down these adventures and invited him to his home to hear the problems of Helen Stoner the morning she arrived. 

“Should it prove to be an interesting case, you would, I am sure, wish to follow it from the outset. “(pg 1)

The doctor does explain in the first paragraph of the story that he did promise secrecy concerning this matter.  However, he felt he was now freed from this promise because the lady he promised has now died.  He says it is best if the facts come to everyone’s attention now since there have been rumors concerning the death of Dr. Grimesby Roylett, one of the major characters in this story.  The rumors are more vicious than the truth. 

During the Victorian period, there were many social changes and intellectual developments. As a result, a crisis of faith rocked society. How...

"In Memoriam," a poem Tennyson composed in memory of his friend Arthur Henry Hallam, who died suddenly in 1833, appeared in 1849. During the 17 years it took Tennyson to write his poem, evolutionary theory began to call into question the idea that God had created the earth and all its creatures. This poem reflects many of the doubts about God current in the Victorian age.

In addition to evolution, industrialism and the machine during this period had invaded the landscape. People wondered where God was in this new world. Was life simply a struggle for the survival of the fittest? As Tennyson put it, did nature "red in tooth and claw," i.e., violent and bloodthirsty, rule the day?

Hallam's death provided a focus for Tennyson's larger queries about the nature of God. Tennyson asked a question common at the time: is God at war ("at strife") with a nature that has evolved without any larger plan? Can it simply be nature (chance), "careless of a single life" that caused his friend's death?

Why, he asks, does nature seem so indifferent to life? Why does nature allow so much death? He writes:

And finding that of fifty seeds/She often brings but one to bear...

This view of nature as harsh and cruel veers sharply away from the Romantic view that nature was imbued with God's spirit. Now, nature and God war with each other. Because of this divide between a natural world of random chance and God, Tennyson calls his faith "lame" and notes that he can only "faintly trust" the larger hope of God. However, although Tennyson spends much time in the poem questioning God from a place of "darkness," by the end of the poem, he is expressing faith:

Then was I as a child that cries,/But, crying knows his father near...

This affirmation would also have been comforting to a Victorian audience. Tennyson both articulated the doubts many people held and yet affirmed an ordered universe with a fatherly God in control. 

In Call It Courage, what are two clues Mafatu notices that warn him that humans have been to the island recently?

From the picture that you have included here, it is clear that you are asking about Chapter 3 of Call It Courage.  In that chapter, the first clue that warns Mafatu that people have been on the island recently is found on p. 46.  There, Mafatu has just found the altar where the cannibals have sacrificed human beings.  We can tell that the cannibals have been there recently because the bones have not been there long.  The book says that

Around the base of the idol he saw piles of bones, charred, but not old.

The next clue is closely related to this one and is found on p. 48.  We are told that he could tell that the cannibals had been there recently because there had not yet been enough time for the wind to disturb the piles of ashes left behind by their fires.  As the book says

It was evident that the savages had been here recently, for the piles of ashes rested undisturbed by wind and storm.

Thus, both of the clues that tell Mafatu that people have been on the island recently are related to the human sacrifices carried out by those people.

If you were a student in Miss Narwin's class from Nothing But the Truth by Avi, and Philip Malloy's mother told your mother that Miss Narwin was...

If I were Miss Narwin's student in Nothing But the Truth by Avi, and Mrs. Malloy told my mother Miss Narwin was the worst teacher in the school, I would hope I would tell the truth. It is quite obvious that Miss Narwin takes her job very seriously and truly cares about her students' learning. She takes great care in crafting her lessons, and she believes in challenging her students to think for themselves. She even volunteers for a class to help her become even better for her students. At the same time, she expects them to do their part--which Phil Malloy isn't interested in doing. I would tell my mother that Phillip is a bit of a class clown, who thinks he should be passed on his charm and sense of humor. If I knew about the Call of the Wild test, I would also tell her about his thoughtless responses--again, an attempt to make the teacher laugh, so that Phillip can get away with not reading the assigned literature. Even so, though Miss Narwin does not accept his answer, she compliments him in her response to it.

"Though your other answers are only a little better, I know you have the potential for good work." Your Fall term work showed greater promise, though your classroom attitude leaves much to be desired" (Avi 13).

Miss Narwin gives Phillip a chance to bring up his grades, but he chooses not to do so. I would tell my mother Phillip is the problem--not Miss Narwin. 

In the book Freak the Mighty, does Max like his bedroom, "the down under"?

Early on in the novel, we learn that Max's bedroom is in the basement of Grim and Gram's house. In fact, Max himself says, "... but do I complain about the crummy panelling, or the rug that smells like low tide? I do not. Because I like it in the down under."

To answer your question, then, it would appear that Max does like the down under, but a better question might be why does he like the down under? He's separated from Grim and Gram, it's dark, and it's confining. Why would anyone like that situation? 

We could possibly view the down under as a symbol for Max's sadness and personal obstacles he must overcome. It's a place for Max to retreat to when he gets upset - for example, when Gwen mistook Max's appearance for his dad, she ran home with Freak, and Max snuck under his bed. 

But it's also a place that Max needs to be lured out of, which is where Freak comes in. Through their adventures and friendship, Freak is able to get Max out of the down under. When Freak dies, of course, Max retreats back to the down under; however, we are left with the impression that through the blank journal that Freak gives him, he won't be in the down under for long!

 

How is Ralph unfriendly to Piggy? Why is that important? Is Ralph an innocent person?

When Ralph and Piggy first meet, it is Piggy who is eager to gain Ralph's friendship. He volunteers a great deal of information about his previous life. He tells him about his Aunty and the candies he would eat; he also shares with him the nickname "Piggy" on the condition that Ralph not share it. But Ralph shares it as soon as the opportunity arises at the first meeting. This slight is perhaps the reason why Piggy voted for Jack as chief. But it certainly indicates that Ralph is not always "nice" to Piggy.

This, along with Ralph's great pleasure at wounding the pig, demonstrates that Ralph is not innocent. He values Piggy in a way that Jack does not and is kinder in his treatment of him, but also more than willing to point out his limitations. 

The final testament to Ralph's loss of innocence comes when the Naval Officer arrives and Ralph weeps for the very fact that he had now lost whatever innocence he had when they crashed on the island.

In Lois Lowry's The Giver, how does Jonas show integrity?

Integrity means standing up for one's beliefs. It means that a person values doing what is right over anything else; and, sometimes standing up for what is right means making decisions that are unpopular. Jonas, in The Giver, shows integrity by choosing not to participate in a society that kills babies for being colicky and eliminates color, music, and snow in order to avoid personal hardships in life. The following passage demonstrates Jonas's courage and integrity when he could have easily turned around and not taken a stand for what he believed was right:

"Jonas reached the opposite side of the river, stopped briefly, and looked back. . . At dawn, the orderly, disciplined life he had always known would continue again, without him. The life where nothing was ever unexpected. Or inconvenient. Or unusual. The life without color, pain, or past. He pushed firmly again at the the pedal with his foot and continued riding along the road" (165).

By Jonas leaving the community, all of the memories would flood back into the people's lives and they would more fully understand what they have been missing in life. If Jonas did not follow through with what he believed was right, the people would go on living without the fulness of joy that life has to offer.

Do the speaker's actions in the poem match his words? Why or why not?

In Robert Frost's poem, "The Mending Wall," the speaker questions the need for a wall to stand between his own property and his neighbor's property. In the poem, the narrator jokes about the stones in the walls, saying that to make them balance, they have to “use a spell,” and say, “Stay where you are until our backs are turned!” Later he wants to question the neighbor who says, “Fences make good neighbors.” The narrator wants to ask, “Why do they make good neighbors?” but he does not. At still another point he wants to say ‘Elves’ are doing the damage to the wall, but he does not say this either. His words within the poem are playful but he does not speak them to his neighbor. His actions are straightforward and serious; he repairs the wall just as his neighbor does. The contrast of the words he thinks and his actions show the difficulty he has communicating with his neighbor and probably other people as well. 

How did da Vinci influence inventors of the 20th Century?

Leonardo da Vinci, the great Italian painter, was also an innovator in the field of mechanics.  He created many sketches which were the predecessors to several important 19th and 20th century inventions.  Da Vinci created a sketch of a primitive tank.  His tanks looked more like flying saucers on wheels.  A boxier war tank was later created and used during World War I.  He also sketched an early version of a helicopter, which "is said to have inspired Igor Sigorsky" as he invented the modern helicopter.  It also could have been the model for which the screw propellor, which is found on modern boat motors, was based on.  He also sketched models of ball bearings, which are found in everything from airplanes to computers.  They are also essential to manufacturing.  He created sketches of scuba diving gear.

What is a living thing?

In addition to having similar chemical composition all living things have these characteristics in common:

1. They are made of cells. They can be single-celled, or multi-cellular with various levels of organization such as tissues, organs and organ systems.

2. They obtain and use energy.

3. They eliminate waste.

4. They grow and develop.

5. They reproduce. This can be sexual or asexual.

6. They respond to their environment. For example, plants turn toward sunlight.

7. They adapt over time to their environment.

8. They move. This might be movement within the cell, or movement of an entire organism such as walking or running.

Something that exhibits some but not all of these characteristics, for example a virus, is not considered a living thing.

How is Tiny Tim from A Christmas Carol considered an innocent youth? Please provide evidence and examples from the movie.

Tiny Tim is an innocent victim of poverty designed to make the viewer or reader sympathetic.

There are hundreds of movie versions of A Christmas Carol, but the basic plot is the same in most of them. Tiny Tim is one of the most popular characters in the book or movie.  He is cute, crippled, and sweet. What’s not to love?

Tiny Tim is Bob Cratchit’s youngest son. Scrooge seems to have no idea of his existence, or of the existence of the rest of Cratchit’s family. When the Ghost of Christmas Present takes Scrooge on a tour, he stops by the Cratchit place.  Scrooge becomes enamored of Tiny Tim almost immediately. He is described as good by his family, and he makes an absolutely adorable blessing. Scrooge worries about him because he is crippled, and asks the ghost if Tiny Tim will live.

“I see a vacant seat,” replied the Ghost, “in the poor chimney-corner, and a crutch without an owner, carefully preserved. If these shadows remain unaltered by the Future, the child will die.”

“No, no,” said Scrooge. “Oh, no, kind Spirit! say he will be spared.” (Stave 3)

When Scrooge goes to the future, he learns that Tiny Tim died and watches the family mourn him. He is very sad to learn this, especially since in his mind he is reformed. The new Scrooge cares a lot about people, especially Tiny Tim. He should have helped the boy.

There is something about Tiny Tim that is symbolic for Scrooge. The boy reminds him of his lonely childhood. He is sympathetic toward him, and comes to care about him as if he was his own son. He keeps his word to Bob Cratchit that he will help the family.

[To] Tiny Tim, who did not die, he was a second father. He became as good a friend, as good a master, and as good a man, as the good old city knew, or any other good old city, town, or borough, in the good old world.

Like the other two children, Ignorance and Want, Tiny Tim is an innocent victim of poverty. Dickens is making the point that people need to look out for each other through children. Tiny Tim is a perfect symbol of the vulnerable. He is a very effective reminder that everyone deserves a better life.

What is probability that the 13th day of randomly chosen month is a Friday?

We want the probability that the 13th day of a randomly chosen month is the 13th.

The naive answer is 1/7 as it would appear that each date is equally likely to be one of the seven days of the week.

There are 14 different calendars that we must consider. For each Jan 1, we consider what happens if it is Mon, Tues, etc... for the rest of the year. This creates seven different possible calendars. But we must also consider leap years so that creates seven more.

For non-leap years:

(1) If Jan 1 is a Monday then Jan 13th is a Saturday. Feb 13th is 31 days later and is on a Tuesday. Then Mar 13 is also a Tuesday. Apr 13 is 31 days later and is on Fri. May 13 is 30 days later on a Sunday. June 13 is 31 days later on a Wed. July 13 is 30 days later on a Fri. Aug 13 is 31 days later on a Mon. Sep 13 is 31 days later on a Thur. Oct 13 is 30 days later on a Sat. Nov13 is 31 days later on a Tues. Dec 13 is 30 days later on a Thur.

So that year has 12 months and has 2 Fri 13ths.

(2) If Jan 1 is a Tuesday there are 2 Fri 13ths.
(3) If Jan 1 is a Wednesday there is 1 Fri 13th (in June)
(4) If Jan 1 is on Thursday there are 3 Fri 13ths.
(5) If Jan 1 is on Fri there is 1 Fri 13th (in Aug.)
(6) If Jan 1 is on Sat there is 1 Fri 13th (in May.)
(7) If Jan 1 is on Sunday there are 2 Fri 13ths.

For leap years we have 2,1,2,2,1,1,3

So there are 14(12)=168 months and 24 of them will have a Fri 13th. So the probability of selecting a random month with a Fri 13th is 24/168=1/7

Describe what England was like before Arthur became king.

Before Arthur is crowned king, England's rulership is in some disarray. King Uther, Arthur's father, has difficulty forming alliances with the rulers of other kingdoms because he used deception to seduce the wife of Duke Gorlois (Ingrain, Arthur's mother). Uther's actions continually put him in the position of defending his kingdom from invasions and usurpation of his crown. When Arthur is born, he is taken from Uther and Igraine to be raised by Merlin (who made Uther swear an oath that if he helped him seduce Igraine, their child would have to go with Merlin) and by Sir Ector, a knight who serves Uther. A few years later Uther dies and there is no heir apparent, because Arthur's birth has been kept secret. There is disagreement as to how a new leader will be chosen. This historical era was rich with mythology and magic, and the novel's depiction of England is of a land steeped in mysticism, hence the prominence of Merlin the necromancer as a character in the story. Merlin arranges with the Archbishop to bring all of the hopefuls wishing to be kind together and they find a sword stuck in a stone, and the message carved into the stone says that whoever frees the sword shall be King. It has been ordained that Arthur will be king; but many knights and lords try to free the sword. Young Arthur removes it by mistake one day, thinking is a sword belonging to his brother, the knight Sir Kay, whom Arthur serves as a squire. There is controversy, but ultimately Arthur is accepted as the king, and peace and abundance flourish for a number of years.

In some versions of the story, Arthur also manages to unite the Christian and pagan factions of his kingdom, allowing the pagan practices and beliefs of the peasants to continue undisturbed even as the Church rises to power and prominence during Arthur's reign.

My assignment is to write an essay on Othello by William Shakespeare. I'm required to choose a quote, which I have chosen this one: "Nothing in...

According to a most reliable text, The Practical Writer, the Introduction of an essay should include the following:

1. A motivator, or hook, to interest the reader (This is the quotation)


2. The thesis statement and a blueprint for the essay (The thesis is a general statement that connects to the quote you have chosen and three main points that you will use to prove this general statement.)

Put your thesis statement last in this introductory paragraph. So, switch sentences, having this sentence last:

Othello by William Shakespeare was a play filled with tension between knowledge, ignorance, and lies.

Your 3 points in the thesis statement--that the play is filled with tension from knowledge, close-mindedness, and lies--will generate the topic sentences for the body paragraphs of the essay.

Re:  knowledge - Iago is the character who is the most knowledgeable of what is taking place since he generates much of the action.
Re: ignorance - Othello, Roderigo, Cassio, and Desmonda are all ignorant of much of what occurs around them. Only Iago seems to be in control of information, information that he manufactures in order to manipulate others.
Re: lies - Iago is the only main character who is aware of everything. He exploits the others such as Cassio, who he gets drunk and sends off to fight Roderigo. 

Upon further examination of your question, perhaps the "it" that you have written at the end of these lines does not just refer to the introductory paragraph ( which is the antecedent of it), but, rather to the entire essay.

(By the way, you may want to correct the thesis statement by changing was to is and between to among since the word between is only used with two elements or people)

Here, then, are some ideas and passages you can use for support:

From the beginning Iago, Shakespeare's greatest villain, preys upon the ignorance of the other characters in his frequently motiveless duplicity. Deception, of course, is based upon the ignorance of others. Here are some examples:

• Iago's duplicity keeps the other's from knowing who is truly is; in fact, he admits to generating their ignorance of him in Act I: "I am not what I am" (1.1.65) Later he remarks about Othello, "

The Moor is of a free and open anture
That thinks men honest that but seem to be so (1.3.379-380)

• Iago convinces Othello of Desmonda's infidelity by deceiving him about the handkerchief.


• Iago tells Roderigo if he gives him money--"Put money in thy purse"(1.3.333)--he (Iago) will see to it that Desdemonda is won over to Roderigo. Instead, he preys upon Roderigo's ignorance and simply steals from him.


• Iago manipulates his wife Emilia into stealing the handkerchief given to Desdemonda in the deceptive hope that Iago encourages. For, Emilia believes that Iago will appreciate her act. "I nothing but to please his fantasy," she says as she steals the handkerchief (3.3.343).

What directly influences the function of the cell?

The endocrine system has a lot to do with cell influence, both directly and indirectly.  The endocrine system is a system of organs in the body that produce chemicals called hormones that influence specific target tissues in the body.  Growth hormone, sometimes abbreviated GH, for example, is secreted by the pituitary gland and is responsible for the manufacture and maintenance of body tissues related to body growth.  It promotes healthy bone structure and maintenance in the skeletal system, as well as the production and maintenance of proteins for the muscular system.  The endocrine system works with a negative feedback style of stimulus.  For example, the pituitary gland, also called the master gland of the endocrine system, may detect low blood sugar levels within the body.  It directs the production of a hormone called glucagon, which acts upon the liver to release stored sugar into the blood stream.

What happens when the congregation sends a group of people to ask Mr. Hooper about his veil?

The narrator says that, despite the fact that many of Mr. Hooper's parishioners are "busybodies and impertinent people" who would normally not hesitate to ask questions, none of them were willing to address him on the subject of the veil.  So, they send a committee or "deputation of the church" in order to find out why he wears the veil.  However, when the committee arrives at Mr. Hooper's home, they find that they cannot broach the subject: "that piece of crape, to their imagination, seemed to hang down before his heart, the symbol of a fearful secret between him and them."  They felt that if he would take the veil off, they could address it; however, as long as he wears it, they cannot.  It sounds as though they all sit together, in awkward silence, until they finally give up and return to their congregation to tell them that the issue would need to be handled by a formal meeting of church elders. 

What are some quotes from Lord of the Flies that show Piggy "the fat boy" being bullied and having low self esteem?

Piggy asked no names. He was intimidated by this uniformed superiority and the offhand authority in Merridew’s voice. He shrank to the other side of Ralph and busied himself with his glasses.

Piggy was intimidated by Jack and showed this by avoiding him. He was not confident enough to ask Jack and his team for their names. He considered himself inferior compared to the other older boys who had just arrived.

“You’re talking too much,” said Jack Merridew. “Shut up, Fatty.”

Laughter arose.

Jack bullied Piggy by calling him names and disrespecting him. He made negative remarks about Piggy’s weight whenever he tried to state his opinion. Jack made Piggy the object of ridicule among his peers.

“We don’t want you,” said Jack, flatly. “Three’s enough.”

When Piggy wanted to join Ralph on the expedition, Jack was mean to him and harshly dismissed him. Jack did all this not knowing it was Piggy’s idea that brought all the boys together in the first place.

“I got the conch–”

Jack turned fiercely.

“You shut up!”

Piggy wilted.

In another instance, Jack sought to humiliate Piggy by dismissing him. Piggy’s self esteem had waned and he was unable to speak up against the attacks by Jack.

He took a step, and able at last to hit someone, stuck his fist into Piggy’s stomach. Piggy sat down with a grunt. Jack stood over him. His voice was vicious with humiliation. “You would, would you? Fatty!” Ralph made a step forward and Jack smacked Piggy’s head. Piggy’s glasses flew off and tinkled on the rocks. Piggy cried out in terror: “My specs!”

Jack physically attacked Piggy, when he asked about the signal fire that was left unattended and was eventually extinguished when they needed it most.

“He hates me. I dunno why. If he could do what he wanted—you’re all right, he respects you."

Piggy was afraid of Jack because he knew Jack did not respect him like he did Ralph.

Piggy was constantly bullied by Jack from the first time they met. Jack did not like Piggy and always took the opportunity to embarrass him.

What are 5 reasons that the Renaissance occurred?

The Renaissance, or Rebirth, was a cultural movement which began in Italy in the late fourteenth century and spread over the next few centuries to the rest of Europe. There are a number of reasons why the Renaissance happened:

1. The wealth of the Italian city-states, like Florence and Genoa, as a result of trading links with the Far East, enabled the patronage of artists and writers. The Medici family, for instance, paid for many works of art to be commissioned. 


2. Because of their strong trade links with the East, these Italian states became the focal point for the dissemination of new ideas. Furthermore, these cities were self-ruling and not hampered by strong monarchies. This situation helped to inspire the creative minds of the Renaissance.


3. When the Byzantine Empire collapsed in 1453, scholars looked to Europe, especially Italy, for refuge. They also took with them great numbers of Classical Roman and Greek books which had been previously lost to people in the West. Italians were now able to read classical works and absorb their ideas.


4. The growth of humanism, which emphasises the power of mankind over God, encouraged people to take a fresh look at their understanding of the past and of the Church's role in society.


5. Many writers began to spur Latin in favour of their own language. Boccaccio, for example, wrote the Decameron in Italian, and this represents an important cultural shift which paved the way for the development of the vernacular. 

What is a summary of chapter two of Where Men Win Glory?

Chapter Two summary of Where Men Win Glory.

For most of his childhood in Fremont, Pat Tillman's family lived in New Almaden. According to his mother, Mary Lydanne Tillman, Pat was a lively infant. Mary maintains that, from the very beginning, her son had always been full of energy, confidence, and tenacity. Pat and his two brothers, Kevin and Richard, often enjoyed hiking at the Almaden Quicksilver County Park during their childhood. As they grew, sports came to dominate the Tillman family schedule. Despite his diminutive size, Pat excelled in football; in 1992, he emerged as Leland's football star. 

In 2007, American soldiers were stationed with Afghan National Army recruits and soldiers from the Afghan Security Guard (ASG) at Forward Operating Base Tillman, a base named in Tillman's honor. The ASG were specially trained by American Special Forces, and many were rumored to have been under the influence of hashish for much of their waking hours. The commander of the ASG was one Abdul Ghani, a Pashtun, who lived according to a strict code of conduct.

In Afghanistan, the majority Pashtuns live by this stringent code of honor, called Pashtunwali. The most important tenets of Pashtunwali are nang (honor), ghairat (pride), badal (revenge), and melmastia (hospitality). Yet, Pashtunwali often proves contradictory in practice. The principle of melmastia, for example, stipulates that all visitors (even enemies) are to be accorded a degree of hospitality. On the other hand, the principle of badal maintains that each slight has to be avenged. The Pashtun believe that respect is derived from demonstrations of strength and courage and that no wrong should be left without redress.

The tenets of Pashtunwali closely mirrored Tillman's own values. Taught to respect traditional masculine virtues from a very young age, Tillman knew how to defend honor and to command respect, both on the football field and in the classroom. Yet, behind the tough exterior lurked a sensitive conscience known to very few. Although Tillman held his own against the bigger boys on the football team, he always defended nerdy classmates who fell victim to bigger tormenters. In many ways, for all his machismo, Tillman was "the antithesis of a bully."

In A Tale Of Two Cities, how are the witnesses John Barsad and Robert Cly discredited at Charles Darnay's trial for espionage?

Robert Cly and John Barsad are suspected (and later revealed) to be spies for the French government. This casts doubt on their reliability in their denunciation of Charles Darnay, who is on trial for espionage when he was returning to England from France. He had just renounced his title and inheritance as an aristocrat and planned to make his life in the freedom of England. Barsad’s testimony is centered on his recognition of Darnay on the ferry crossing the English Channel. Sydney Carton, however, passes a note to Stryver, the lawyer defending Charles, on his similar appearance to Charles. Stryver instructs Carton to remove his wig and stand, so the two of them can be compared. The court is struck by the similarity and thus casts doubt on Barsad’s ability to indentify him with any surety. This supplies enough doubt on Barsad’s testimony, and thus Charles Darnay is acquitted.

In the play Macbeth, how did Lady Macbeth persuade her husband to carry out his evil plan?

Lady Macbeth comes across as more unscrupulous and ruthless than her husband, but since he had decided been connived by the witches into believing that he would become king by greeting him with the title 'thane of Cawdor' and saying that he shall be 'king hereafter,' it did not take too much for her to persuade him to commit the most grievous of crimes - the ultimate betrayal.

Macbeth expressed doubt about murdering his king and cousin since, as he reasoned, he was too close to him - Duncan was his kin. Added to that was the fact that Duncan was a guest in his castle and needed his protection, not his rancor. He had been such a good and noble king, that there would be a terrible outcry if he should be found murdered. Macbeth then told his wife: 'We will proceed no further in this business.' She however, was insistent.  

At first she asked what had happened to the hope that Macbeth expressed when he first decided to perform his evil. She rhetorically ask whether it was borne out of inebriation. Was he not at full composure when he declared that he would kill Duncan? She stated that she would henceforth adjudge his love on that basis. She thus placed him in a very uncomfortable situation: in order to prove his love for her, he had to carry through what he had promised.

She then questioned his courage by asking him if he had more nerve to speak about murdering Duncan than in actually performing the act? She asked whether he would rather obtain the crown than live thinking about his cowardice. She compared him, in this sense, to the cat in the adage who desired to have fish but was too afraid to wet its feet. Macbeth, in his defense said that he would do everything that a man is supposed to do, and even more. There was none who would do more than he.

Lady Macbeth was unrelenting and asked him what 'beast' had possessed him to break his promise. She stated that when he had made the promise, he was more of a man than he was at that point, and for him daring to be more than what he had been, would make him more of a man. She mentioned that when he made the vow to kill Duncan, neither the time nor the place had been an issue, but now that the conditions were ideal, he suddenly relented. She said that his fear had made him a coward and, using a horrific metaphor to illustrate how strongly she felt about making a promise, she said that she would pluck a suckling babe from her nipple to bash out its brains if that is what she had promised to do. 

Macbeth still expressed doubt and she guaranteed that they would not fail. Lady Macbeth showed just how wicked and scheming she actually was by describing a carefully constructed plan for the king's murder. She told Macbeth that she would get Duncan's personal bodyguards drunk by plying them with wine and ale. They would then be indisposed and the king would be fast asleep after a long journey. This would give them the ideal opportunity to commit their treacherous deed.

Macbeth expressed pride in his wife's 'undaunted mettle' (bold resolve) and was finally convinced. He suggested that they smear Duncan's blood on the daggers of the sleeping guards to implicate them. His wife added that they would make a loud clamor at the discovery of Duncan's death so as to avoid suspicion falling on them. Macbeth then expressed his determination to proceed and asked her to put on an appearance of goodness and conviviality, for: 'False face must hide what the false heart doth know.' 

Who is Gertrude's enemy?

On a superficial level, Gertrude does not have any enemies in Hamlet. No character actively plots her destruction, nor does she plot the demise of any other character. Even the ghost of King Hamlet admonishes Hamlet to not harm Gertrude but to save his revenge for Claudius.

However, of the characters in the play, Claudius behaves most like an enemy toward Gertrude. First, Claudius murdered King Hamlet, her husband. Though she marries Claudius very soon after the murder (angering Hamlet), it does not appear that she was aware of her new husband's actions. Second, Claudius plotted the murder of her son. Finally, Claudius inadvertently killed Gertrude when she accidentally drank the poison he had intended for Hamlet. Thus, although Claudius never actively plotted against Gertrude, his evil actions repeatedly caused her harm.

I have an assignment where I have to analyze We Real Cool by using TPCASTT (title, paraphrase, connotation, diction, attitude, tone, shift(s),...

You are doing an excellent job so far! I think your paraphrase is spot on, except the last sentence could be more dire than "get in trouble." Perhaps you could say something like, "We don't realize it yet, but we are headed for an early grave." 

Connotation refers to a deeper meaning. The deeper meaning might be something about how peer pressure blinds youth to the consequences of their actions; they find safety in numbers as friends reinforce bad choices and lead young people astray. More than one connotation is possible, and often the theme and connotation are closely related.

For diction, you should note the dialect the poem is written in. You might describe it as an inner-city dialect or a dialect that reveals a lack of education. For example, the concept expressed in the title would be phrased "we are very cool" if the speakers were using standard English. The wording chosen creates a cadence or rhythm that is swaggering and proud; the repetitive use of "we" reinforces the undue focus on themselves in an off-putting way. 

You have the right idea about the attitude, but "lighthearted" is probably not what you want. Here are some other words to express what you may be picking up from this poem: flippant, rebellious, cocky, and over-confident. 

The shifts you mention are on the mark. The end is somber, sobering, shocking, and even tragic. 

For the title, a better word than "sarcastic" might be "ironic," which indicates that things turn out the opposite of what would be expected. 

Again, you have a good idea about the theme. The theme is a universal truth we can derive from a literary work, so you should state it in a complete sentence. You could say, "Young people who take pride in their rebellion will suffer the consequences." Tying it back to the connotation, you could say, "Peer pressure encourages young people to take pride in their rebellion and blinds them to the consequences of their poor decisions."

Does time exist, or has quantum theory disproved its existence?

According to Hermann Minkowski, Albert Einstein’s mathematics teacher, space and time make up the same reality. In this regard, he also stated that independently, both space and time would fade into obscurity. This led to the idea that reality exists in both space and time together, with space providing the three dimensions of height, width and depth while time contributes the fourth dimension. Thus, time cannot exist independently but exists as the Space-time continuum.

Experiments have been performed to further explain this theory and to confirm the non-existence of time or, at least, disapprove how we currently understand it. The double slit experiment showed an individual bit of matter such as a photon passing through both slots at the same time, passing individually through both slits and not passing in any of the slots, exhibiting an “interference pattern.” A similar experiment based on the double slit experiment and known as the delayed choice experiment further disapproved the existence of time as we know it. It confirmed that the definition of time affects the movement of bits of matter from one place to the other.

For instance, an electron shot towards a larger rounded piece of matter would move through two different paths (left or right/ up or down) at the same time. This phenomenon is thus determined by the observer who would make a choice of which path the electron followed based on the definition and interpretation of time. However, the electron moved similarly to the double slit experiment.

Compare and contrast "I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud" to Walter de la Mare's poem "The Storm." How does each poet depict nature differently? How do...

In “I Wandered Lonely as a Cloud,” the speaker is a human, who experiences the startling beauty of nature through the unexpected discovery of an entire sea of daffodils by the water. This poem is pensive and calm, using light, frivolous vocabulary: the daffodils are “fluttering and dancing in the breeze,” and “tossing their heads in sprightly dance.” The waves in the bay, as well, dance and sparkle, and yet the daffodils are more captivating even than the ocean, multitudinous as they are, as the stars in the sky. 

In Wordsworth’s poem nature is powerful and inviting, exhibiting forces of healing in the form of bright colors and gentle vibes. It is recounted from a comfortable, safe perspective; when the speaker is resting on his safe, warm couch, the memories of his solo walk along the bay

…flash upon that inward eye
Which is the bliss of solitude;
And then my heart with pleasure fills,
And dances with the daffodils.

These recollections serve as a comfort and pleasure to him, even when he is comfortable in a pleasant environment.  Such was the power of the scene.

De la Mare’s poem also presents nature as a powerful force, but an impersonal, destructive one. The poem is told from the perspective of sea birds in a storm, and the vocabulary is a violent as Wordsworth’s is serene:  “And the wind rose, and the sea rose,/To the angry billows’ roar,” and in the second verse,

And the yeasty surf curdled over the sands,
The gaunt grey rocks between;
And the tempest raved, and the lightning’s fire
Struck blue on the spindrift hoar –

Here the birds have lost control, and the storm is forcing them onto the shore, waves tossing and wind howling, a wholly different scene than Wordsworth’s happy spring day.  Even in the end, when the storm breaks and the sun comes out, we see the lingering effects of the chaos – “the bright green headlands shone/As they’d never shone before,” and yet within this setting we have vast hoards of sea birds breaking this lovely post-storm calm with their “screeching, scolding, [and] scrabbling.” But in the final two lines of the poem, we see also “A snowy, silent, sun-washed drift/Of sea-birds on the shore.” And herein lies the true destruction: while a whole host of birds are tumbling through the sky, another host of birds has been killed by the violence of the storm.

Both poems depict the unpredictability of nature, and yet because Wordsworth’s poem is from the point of view of a man, on a bright spring day, his poem is more domestic and simple than that of de la Mare. The latter presents the point of view of nature itself, only to switch to a third person, withdrawn perspective at the end of the poem; humans have no role in the events that unfold. Any humans that exist in the area would have been safely indoors during the storm, away from any danger. We therefore get the rawness of nature where we would normally escape it for our fires and our beds; here is the flip-side of natural beauty – natural destruction. This poem is no walk in the garden, but a story of the wildness of natural processes.

How is Mark Antony more astute than Brutus?

Both Antony and Brutus are intelligent, but they have different temperaments. Brutus is an introvert and Antony is very obviously an extrovert. Brutus is unworldly, while Antony is very worldly. Antony is always characterized as a man who loves having fun. He is very self-indulgent. He likes sports. When he first appears with his good friend Caesar he is prepared to run in a foot race as part of the celebration of the Lupercal. Since Antony devotes so much of his free time to sensualism, it is clear that he cannot have very much time to devote to study. Brutus is just the opposite. He is shown reading a book even on the eve of the battle at Philippi. This is a real bookworm! Antony is able to take advantage of Brutus because he is worldly wise. He might be called "street smart," to use a modern term. Brutus understands books, but Antony understands people. He knows how to get around Brutus even when he is in the deepest trouble of his life. He would have been killed if Cassius had had his way.

Cassius is another worldly wise man like Antony. Cassius can read Antony's mind. He tells Brutus earlier that Antony might prove to be "a shrewd contriver." Caesar is just as worldly wise at Antony and Cassius. Caesar says of Cassius:

He reads much,
He is a great observer, and he looks
Quite through the deeds of men. He loves no plays,
As thou dost, Antony; he hears no music;
Seldom he smiles, and smiles in such a sort
As if he mock'd himself, and scorn'd his spirit
That could be moved to smile at any thing.

Antony does prove to be a shrewd contriver. He knows just how to manipulate Brutus and manages, not only to save his own skin, but to get permission to speak at Caesar's funeral. He tells Brutus he is willing to join the conspirators in their proposed new government if Brutus can explain his reasons for killing Caesar. Brutus jumps at the bait. He loves talking about reasons, logic, abstractions. When he speaks to the citizens he emphasizes his reasons for leading the conspiracy against Caesar. He really has no concrete evidence, only his suspicions of what Caesar might have done if he had been allowed to life.

Antony doesn't really care about reasons. He is a pragmatist. He cares about whatever works. But he conveys the impression that he is a fair and reasonable man just like Brutus. Brutus makes the mistake of trusting Antony. Unfortunately, as Shakespeare shows, it is often a mistake to trust people in our lives. Brutus' willingness to trust in the good will of others leads to his downfall. Antony does not even seem embarrassed about double-crossing the more noble and idealistic gentleman. Antony comes out on top because he is a realist and a pragmatist, cynical and unscrupulous. In Antony and Cleopatra, Shakespeare shows how Antony is destroyed by Octavius, who is even more of a realist and pragmatist, more cynical and more unscrupulous. 

Cassius also understands Brutus and knows how to manipulate him. After they separate in Act 1, Scene 2, Cassius says to himself:

Well, Brutus, thou art noble; yet, I see
Thy honorable metal may be wrought
From that it is disposed; therefore it is meet
That noble minds keep ever with their likes;
For who so firm that cannot be seduced?

What does the The Declaration of Independence reveal about the main causes behind the war of independence?

The Declaration of Independence reveals deeply embedded causes for the war of independence in colonial society.

Upon reading Jefferson's document, it is clear that the call for war was not something that the Colonists took lightly.  It was not instantaneous. Rather, The Declaration of Independence shows that the reasons for separating from England took place over time and were deeply rooted in the way Colonists saw the world and their place in it.

One way that the Declaration of Independence reveals the main causes for war with England is in its call for human rights.  The document's Preamble and the Statement on Human Rights argues that there are specific entitlements that every human being should experience.  When these are absent, a cause for change is evident:

When in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

Jefferson's Preamble articulates that violating the natural rights that human beings possess represents a reason for separation and a cause for war. Colonists were able to see their struggle against England as a struggle for human rights, compelling them to embrace change.

From the universal, Jefferson focuses on the specific. The Declaration of Independence does not only make a case for separation on a human rights level, but also in the specific experiences of the Colonists. Jefferson details his charges against the British King and of Parliament in the middle of the document.  When Jefferson says, "let facts be submitted to a candid world," he justifies a war for Colonial independence.  Charges such as "He [King George III] has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good," or that the British government has "obstructed the Administration of Justice," and "For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent," resonated with colonists.  Jefferson understood that making charges like these public allowed colonists to share a common experience. Many of them had experienced the injustices that the Jefferson identifies. These charges showed the deep grievances that Colonists held against the British, and reveal that the main causes for independence existed on a structural level.

What are the similarities and differences between the caste system in India and the class system of the contemporary United States?

The class system in the United States is very rigid, there is no doubt about it. It is very difficult to be born into poverty and eventually become wealthy in your lifetime. The major distinction between the caste and class system are the words "very difficult" in the previous sentence. In a caste system, it is not even possible to be born into one caste and move to the next. The caste system guarantees that people are born into a caste and must perform the duties of that caste for their entire life. Only by performing these duties admirably, can a person hope to increase their lot in the next life through reincarnation. In the United States, some members of the lower classes, through hard work, education and luck can move to the middle or upper classes. While this should not be considered common, it is quite possible and does happen. The same can be said of wealthy people that make poor decisions and end up in the lower classes.  The caste system is also closely tied to the religion of Hinduism and not such religious connection exists in the American class system.  

The major similarities between the caste system and American class system are the difficulty for social mobility and how the caste or class limits the potential success of its members.  Both are systems to organize and control different parts of the population.  

Reread lines 12-24 and restate the central idea from Emerson's "Self-Reliance."

In lines 12-24, Emerson states that self-reliance starts, as we might imagine, with the individual's decision that he must work hard to develop his talents: "no kernel of nourishing corn can come to him but through his toil bestowed on that plot of ground which is given to him to till." 

But self-reliance means more than simply doing hard work. It also involves discerning what particular task God has called you as an individual to do and then accepting that call. It means being original: "imitation is suicide." In Emerson's view, God has planted into each one of us a particular gift, what he calls a "preestablished harmony...that divine idea which each one of us represents." To develop this divine idea or gift means understanding who one is as a unique individual, and daring to be a nonconformist in pursuit of one's goals: "Trust thyself: every heart vibrates to that iron string." For that reason, self-reliance requires courage. In contrast, ignoring one's God-given call, no matter how hard a person might try to run away from it, will leave that individual tormented. " A man is relieved and gay when he has put his heart into his work," but not otherwise. 

In a nutshell, the self-reliant person must work hard, have the courage to find and follow the path God has laid out for him, and have faith that the only real peace of mind comes from following one's destiny, no matter what it might be.  

What are the themes throughout the play The Lion and the Jewel?

Wole Soyinka examines several themes throughout the play The Lion and the Jewel. He explores the themes of modernity versus tradition. Lakunle favors Western civilization and wishes that his village of Ilujinle would embrace modernity. In contrast, Baroka represents traditional Yoruba culture and thwarts continued efforts to modernize his village. Soyinka also examines the concepts of masculinity and femininity throughout the play. Sidi, the village jewel, is desired only for her beauty. In traditional Yoruba culture, women are essentially possessions and are bought with the payment of the bride-price. In traditional Yoruba culture, strength, vitality, and sexual prowess are revered, and Baroka is ridiculed for his assumed impotence. Once Baroka is said to be impotent, he loses respect throughout the village. Soyinka also explores the theme of power. Once Sidi becomes famous from her published images in a foreign magazine, she becomes conceited and wishes to be revered above the Bale. The Bale also cherishes power and fears becoming old and irrelevant.

What are some of the long term impacts of Spanish colonization on North America?

In 1492, Christopher Columbus sailed to the Americas on behalf of the Spanish King and Queen.  He stopped in Cuba and Hispaniola and spread Spanish religion, culture, and language.  In the 1500s, Juan Ponce DeLeon, Hernando de Soto, and Juan Rodriguez Cabrillo explored other parts of North America on behalf of the Spanish.  Like Christopher Columbus, they left the lasting impacts of Spanish language, culture, and Catholicism in those places.  Also in the 1500s, the Franciscan Order came to North America to establish Christian missions.  St. Augustine in Florida was founded and New Spain was established.  Eventually, the United States acquired Florida, Texas, California, and other parts of New Spain.  The country of Mexico was established.  However, the influence of the Spaniards remained.  In Mexico, Catholicism and the Spanish language are dominant.  In the American Southwest, Spanish culture and Spanish language are common.  Historic Spanish missions still remain, and many places and landmarks retain their Spanish names.

In The Great Gatsby, was Gatsby's wealth enough to win Daisy's love ? Please provide quotes to support your stance.

The short answer to your question is no, Gatsby's wealth simply wasn't enough on its own to win Daisy's love--at least not the way Gatsby wanted.  And here is where the complication occurs.  Gatsby has shaped his entire life around winning the love of Daisy Buchanan.  He developed an entire new persona, morphing from the less-than-average James Gatz who has no social status to the mega-nouveau riche Jay Gatsby who is the mysterious toast of New York.  He spent much of his life tracking Daisy's, collecting every scrap of information he could about her.  When she and Tom settle in East Egg, Gatsby swoops up the property across the bay to be near her.  He stages elaborate parties for one reason only--in the fantastical hope that Daisy and Tom might wander through his gardens on some fated night.  When this fails to happen, Gatsby takes quick advantage of a "friend-of-a-friend" connection in order to re-connect with his lost love.  And it works.  Daisy and Gatsby re-kindle their romance, but she never loses sight of Tom.  In a fit of exasperation, she exclaims,

"Oh, you want too much!" she cried to Gatsby. "I love you now – isn't that enough? I can't help what's past." She began to sob helplessly. "I did love him once – but I loved you too."

This is not enough for Gatsby.  He didn't want to be an additional love in Daisy's life.  He wanted to turn back time, to go to a place where Daisy never loved Tom at all, where he is the only man she has ever wanted.  And not all the money in the world could do that for Daisy.

How can I come up with a thesis and three arguments about the immaturity of the characters in Romeo and Juliet?

Although it may be easy to assign a good deal of immaturity to the character of Juliet, because she is only 13, Romeo and Mercutio are easily the most immature characters in Shakespeare's tragedy.

While Juliet makes the tough decisions, Romeo, on the other hand is quick to act without thinking and ignores the advice of Friar Laurence who says in Act II, Scene 6,

"Therefore love moderately; long love doth so; Too swift arrives as tardy as too slow."

Romeo fails to heed the friar's words and at almost every juncture of the play acts rashly without fully considering his path. Even at the beginning of the play we meet a Romeo who is badly wounded by Cupid's arrow and throughout his opening lines in Act I he moans and groans about how he is in love with a woman who will not reciprocate his love. He shuts himself up in the dark of his room and takes long walks unaccompanied to wade in his sorrow.

Once he sees Juliet at the Capulet party he immediately forgets Rosaline and falls head over heels for the young girl he admires from across the room. Juliet, although very much attracted to Romeo, professes that maybe she has been too familiar and asks Romeo to wait. In the famous balcony scene, Act II, Scene 2, Juliet says,

Well, do not swear. Although I joy in thee,
I have no joy of this contract tonight.
It is too rash, too unadvised, too sudden,
Too like the lightning, which doth cease to be
Ere one can say “It lightens.” Sweet, good night.
This bud of love, by summer’s ripening breath,
May prove a beauteous flower when next we meet.

Romeo, however, is not to be put off. He presses Juliet with a marriage proposal, "Th’ exchange of thy love’s faithful vow for mine." He confers with Friar Laurence and sets up the wedding the following day. He has known Juliet for less than 24 hours.

After the marriage he tries to be the mature young man. He puts off the challenge of Tybalt in Act III, Scene I:

Tybalt, the reason that I have to love thee
Doth much excuse the appertaining rage
To such a greeting. Villain am I none.
Therefore farewell. I see thou knowest me not.

He even tries to stop the fight between Mercutio and Tybalt but because of his actions his best friend is mortally wounded under his arm. After it is revealed that Mercutio is dead Romeo loses control and once again shows his immaturity. Instead of taking a step back and analyzing the situation he launches into a fight because he feels that he has been too "effeminate" and that fate wills him forward.

Afterward he is at his most immature and obnoxious in Friar Laurence's cell when he laments the fact that he has been banished and will not be able to look upon the face of Juliet again. He ignores the fact that the Prince only sentences him to exile and not death:

’Tis torture and not mercy. Heaven is here
Where Juliet lives, and every cat and dog
And little mouse, every unworthy thing,
Live here in heaven and may look on her,
But Romeo may not.

Finally Friar Laurence assuages Romeo's fears and the young man goes off to consummate his marriage with Juliet and then to Mantua to fulfill his sentence of exile.

Of course, when he learns from Balthasar that Juliet is dead he again demonstrates his immaturity by insisting on taking his own life to be with his love. He invokes the specter of fate as he vows to lie with Juliet: "Is it e’en so?—Then I defy you, stars!" He rushes to the Capulet's vault without consulting anyone. A simple visit to the Friar would have revealed the plan to reunite the young lovers. Instead, Romeo forces his way into the tomb, kills Paris and then himself just as Juliet is awakening. (In an aside, I absolutely love Baz Luhrmann's  take on the play when he has Romeo recognizing that Juliet is still alive as he dies. It serves him right.)

Romeo is not alone in his immaturity. His best friend Mercutio consistently shows a lack of maturity. His Queen Mab monologue in Act I, Scene 4 reaks of a childlike mind with its focus on fantasy. Again, after Romeo ditches his friends to see Juliet, Mercutio cannot accept Romeo's disappearance and cries out in the night, insulting his friend:

Romeo! Humors! Madman! Passion! Lover!
Appear thou in the likeness of a sigh.
Speak but one rhyme and I am satisfied.

In Act III, the turning point of the play, Mercutio is at his most immature. Instead of heeding the warnings of Benvolio:

I pray thee, good Mercutio, let’s retire.
The day is hot, the Capels abroad,
And if we meet we shall not ’scape a brawl,
For now, these hot days, is the mad blood stirring.

he let's Tybalt goad him into a fight which ultimately leads to his demise. (In another aside: if you watch the Zeffirelli movie Mercutio is totally out of control and let's his pride and masculinity get in the way of good sense. Of course the fight with Tybalt is probably the best sword fight ever put to celluloid.)

I think it is also possible to make a case that Lord Capulet is immature in his treatment of his daughter, especially at the end of Act III when he promises his daughter to Paris. His berating of Juliet when she refuses his declaration at the end of the Act does not reveal a man of patience and maturity. In analyzing Lord Capulet, however, I tend to like him. I like his kind words about Romeo in Act I at the party and I think he is only trying to look out for his child.

Tybalt could also be considered as an immature character were it not for the fact that Shakespeare portrays him as a villain and an antagonist to the protagonist Romeo. Tybalt is a static character and a slave to Shakespeare's plot. Romeo and Mercutio, however, should know better.

How do issues of race or gender and hegemonies between nationalities function in Tomson Highway's play Dry Lips Oughta Move to Kapuskasing? Is...

"Dry Lips Oughta Move to Kapuskasing" tells of hegemonies between the Native and non-Native Canadians. The play focuses on the men and women of the Wasaychigan Hill Indian Reserve in Ontario, Canada. Larger themes within the play hint at the inequalities between white and Native populations within Canada, but there are more overt hegemonies that take place within the reservation itself.

Most of the conflicts in the play involve seven Native men who live on the Wasaychigan Reserve. The men continually act out the frustration of their disempowerment through violence, alcoholism and other self-defeating acts. Their conflicts with each other mirror the larger conflict the entire reservation feels with non-Native society as it continues to take over.

Another primary conflict within the play lies between the Native spirituality practiced by the most devout inhabitants of "The Rez" and Christianity. Spooky is a local who has converted to Christianity and incites conflict within his community with his often aggressive attempts at proselytization. Spooky is a representative of the outside hegemonies between Native beliefs and the white male Christian power structure that has nearly erased them in this setting.

In The Giver, how does the setting affect the main character's attitude and actions?

By main character, you must be referring to Jonas, and one could argue that he acts both obediently and rebelliously as a result of the setting.

He acts obediently, as all members of the society do, throughout most of the book. He follows the rules and routine of the community and does not, at least outwardly, question them. In this way, he is responding directly to the setting in which he lives. He lives in an orderly community that dictates everything he does. He does as he is told and nothing more. He knows no other setting.

As he begins to learn about the way society used to be, however, he does begin to question why the community has chosen to be the way it is now. In moving to Sameness, he recognizes that individuals gave up their freedom and ability to choose for themselves. This causes him to want to have more freedom and to want to have choices. This is when he begins to rebel against this dystopian setting he has been living in all of his life and ultimately escape it.

Compare and contrast the traditional cell theory with the modern cell theory.

As technology began to advance during the Renaissance, scientists' ability to look more closely at living organisms brought us classical cell theory. By 1855, the three basic parts were in place. They are that all living things are composed of cells, cells are the basic units of structure and function in living things, and that all cells are produced from other cells.

There were several major advances that changed in the three centuries leading up to this. In 1663, Robert Hooke observed small, boxlike structures when he looked at cork under an early compound microscope. He did not know their structure or function, and as he was looking at dead, dried samples did not see any organelles. Anton von Leewenhoek observed living, unicellular organisms in 1674. In the 1850s Schleiden, Schwann, and Virchow added that animals and plants are made of cells, and that cells arise from other living cells.

Modern cell theory builds on the previous three components; it does not eliminate any of the earlier information. Modern cell theory adds that energy flows within cells, hereditary information is passed on from cell to cell, and that all cells have the same basic chemical composition. Major advances in technology in chemical analysis, DNA technology and microscopy have added to our information about cells.

Describe the attitude of the townspeople as they go to church in the first paragraph of "The Minister's Black Veil." What does it tell about...

In the beginning of the story, the townspeople seem very carefree and happy.  The narrator says that

Children, with bright faces, tripped merrily beside their parents, or mimicked a graver gait, in the conscious dignity of their Sunday clothes.  Spruce bachelors looked sidelong at the pretty maidens, and fancied that the Sabbath sunshine made them prettier than on week days.

Young and old move together toward the meeting-house to attend religious services.  Children seem playful and energetic while young men, all dressed up, make eyes at the lovely young women who seem even lovelier today than usual.  It is hardly the typical Puritan scene.  We often see them as austere and somber, worrying anxiously over the fate of their eternal souls: a fate over which they have no control because God has predetermined which of them will go to heaven.  We never consider the Puritans to be people who are concerned with how well they're dressed or how pretty they are.  Such a carefree scene seems to imply that they really do not take their religious lives as seriously as we tend to believe.  This interpretation is later confirmed by their response to the veil's meaning, a meaning they "darkly understand" and choose to run away from because it is too uncomfortable to think of themselves and their minister as possessing "secret sins" that they feel compelled to hide from the world.

How does the film Schindler's List portray the Holocaust in general? How, for example, is the suffering of the Jews presented? How is the cruelty...

The movie version of Schindler's List was directed by Steven Spielberg and released in 1993. If you have any doubts about how good this movie is, consider the Academy awards it won: best picture, best director, best writing, best editing, best set design, best music, and best makeup. It is also #9 on the American Film Institute's all time greatest American movies list.

Schindler's List takes a different look at the Holocaust. Based on the true story of Oskar Schindler, the movie depicts one man's attempt to save a group of imprisoned Jews during World War II. The viewer sees some of the horrors of life in a concentration camp, but the focus of the movie is on Schindler's transformation from an opportunistic businessman into a self-sacrificing humanitarian. Throughout the film, the viewers know that “Schindler's Jews” (as his manufacturing employees are called), are just a whim away from the crematorium. The suspense lies in wondering whether or not Schindler will be able to save them from the fate suffered by so many millions of other Jewish prisoners.

We see the Jews suffer when they are driven from their homes, separated from family members, and randomly murdered. Although Schindler's Jews manage to avoid the worst of this, the viewers know that it is only Schindler keeping them safe.

As for the cruelty of the Nazis, the viewer sees a fairly clichéd portrayal. None of the Nazi leaders seem to have any humanity regarding the Jews' fate. In reality, we know that some of these people did not approve of what was happening, but with the prevailing atmosphere in Nazi Germany, they could do nothing about it without risking themselves in some way. One of the most memorable images from the movie shows a man looking at piles of teeth extracted from prisoners, examining the gold fillings.

In what way or ways does H.H. Munro (Saki) provide examples of irony in his short story The Interlopers?

The main type of irony H.H. Munro, also known by his pseudonym as “Saki,” employed in his short story The Interlopers is situational. In fact, situational irony is present throughout this story of two men, bitter enemies, who find themselves victim of the very natural phenomenon over which they had fought and who ultimately succumb to forces very different from those which they had anticipated. Ulrich von Gradwitz is legal owner to a stretch of forest that his rich in game. Georg Znaeym is now patriarch of a neighboring clan that continues to claim rightful ownership of the land in question despite judicial determinations in Ulrich’s favor. The hatred that these two men have for each is legend, as George will later note when suggesting the irony of these two men walking side-by-side into town following their shared ordeal: “’How the whole region would stare and gabble if we rode into the marketsquare together.”

The first, and main example of situational irony is suggested in the story’s opening passage, in which the reader is introduced to Ulrich, who is patrolling the disputed land in question in search, not of game, but of his human prey, Georg. Munro has emphasized the bountiful animal resources this land possesses, and that hunting game would be the natural order of things. The feud between families, however, has transformed the nature of Ulrich’s hunt from one for food to one for revenge.

Another element of situational irony exists in the fact of these two men’s demise occurring by virtue of the very land that is at the center of their dispute. Both men treasure the stretch of forest. As Munro’s unseen narrator points out early in the story:

“The forest lands of Gradwitz were of wide extent and well stocked with game; the narrow strip of precipitous woodland that lay on its outskirt was not remarkable for the game it harboured or the shooting it afforded, but it was the most jealously guarded of all its owner’s territorial possessions.”

Yet, it would be the natural growth of this forest, and the equally natural phenomenon of a violent storm, that would spell their demise. When fierce winds blow a tree down onto both men, there is an element of God-given justice to go with the situation’s irony. Both men, and their respective families and employees, covet this land, and both act as self-righteous, violent antagonists toward each other. That they should both be felled by the same tree, then, constitutes a sort of irony and a measure of divine intervention.

Another example of situational irony is the evolving relationship between Ulrich and Georg that occurs while both men remain trapped under the aforementioned tree. Two individuals determined, out of a visceral mutual hatred, to murder each other are suddenly reflective of the idiocy of their situation and develop a common rapport that transitions into genuine friendship. When The Interlopers begins, the reader can only presume that the antagonism between the two men will end with one’s murder of the other. As they lay trapped under the tree, both wounded, Georg blinded by the blood caked onto his eyes, first Ulrich and then Georg discover the underlying humanity in each other. As Georg reconsiders his feelings towards Ulrich, spawned initially by the latter’s offer of wine from his flask, he now sees that the feud that has driven their relationship has been misplaced:

“I never thought to have wanted to do other than hate you all my life, but I think I have changed my mind about things too, this last half-hour. And you offered me your wineflask … Ulrich von Gradwitz, I will be your friend.”

The irony in these men’s transition from murderous intent to friendship is profound, as is the final element of situational irony present in The Interlopers: the resolution of their ordeal. As noted, the reader can be forgiven for assuming that Munro’s story would end with the murder of one by the other, or, even by a sequence of events that results in their both being shot by each other, or by their respective allies, references to whom are frequent. The story, though, ends with Ulrich’s observation that the beings hurrying in their direction are the allies of neither man, but are wolves, the obvious intent of which would be their slow, painful deaths at the mouths of these ravenous creatures. This outcome represents the ultimate irony in Munro’s narrative. Readers have had no reason to anticipate this development, but there it is—an outcome at variance with that which was anticipated.

I need to write two 15 line poems about the novel Crabbe by William Bell. One poem must be about a major character and one about a minor character....

This sounds like an interesting assignment. The first step should be to choose the two characters. Choosing Crabbe as the main character would be practical and give you the most to write about. He also has a very clear journey from the time he runs away to the time he comes home, so tracing it would be fairly simple as long as you don't try to include everything that happened to him while he was gone. As for the minor character you choose, you might consider one of his parents or someone else affected by him running away. Just as he goes through multiple feelings and experiences while he is gone, so do those who are left at home and worried about him.

Since each poem must be fifteen lines long, consider breaking each poem up into three sections. For example, the first five lines examines the beginning of Crabbe's journey, the next five look at the middle of his journey, and the last five examine the resolution of his journey. 

Avoiding acrostic poetry should be fairly simple, as this would probably take you more work to actually craft. If you want the piece to rhyme, consider a format and rhyme scheme. Here is a link to a website that gives some pointers on why you might choose to rhyme and how to begin to do so: Creative Writing Now.

Is Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows sexist?

The Deathly Hallows, and the Harry Potter series more generally, isn't overtly sexist, but you can catch whiffs of sexism here and there. The question you have to ask yourself is: What roles do the women in this world inhabit? The uncomfortable answer is that the women are almost always defined by their role as girlfriends, wives, or mothers—domestic caretakers and objects of the affections of more-developed male characters.

Take Bellatrix Lestrange—incidentally, the only woman in Voldemort's inner circle. Do we ever see her acting on her own, for her own reasons? No; she is always merely an agent of Voldemort's will. Why does she do all this? Because she is embarrassingly, slavishly devoted to Voldemort, for reasons that are unclear. Voldemort acts based on a considered set of principles, however skewed they may be. He has looked at his world, thought about it a lot, set goals for himself, and worked to achieve them. Bellatrix, a prodigiously talented witch, acts because her master orders her to.  

Think of Fleur Delacour. When we met her in Goblet of Fire, Fleur was defined primarily by her physical appearance. Although she was so talented that she was selected to represent her school in the Triwizard Tournament, we saw her as a prize—the belle of the Yule Ball and the object of Ron's lust. (And oh by the way, she performed significantly worse than all three male Triwizard contestants, even at one point succumbing to a grindylow, which third year wizards and witches can defeat.)

In Deathly Hallows, now that Fleur is of age and able to join the Order, what is she doing? Cooking and cleaning Shell Cottage for her husband Bill Weasley. Period.

Then there's Fleur's mother-in-law, steady old Mrs. Weasley. Throughout the series, we rarely see Mrs. Weasley doing anything other than cooking and housework. Occasionally she takes time off to scold her children and husband. We learn about Arthur's hobbies, we travel with him to the Quidditch World Cup, and we see him accept an increasing amount of responsibility in the Order. What do we see of Molly that implies she is an interesting individual with agency and a rich inner life? I can't think of anything. Loving mother and dutiful wife—the oldest gender roles in the book. It shows up even in her spotlight moment, the duel with Bellatrix Lestrange. Why does Mrs. Weasley take her on? Because she attacked Ginny.

Similarly, Narcissa Malfoy's great redemption is based not on principle, not on moral growth, not on her complex personal history, but on her role as a mother. After Voldemort casts the Avada Kedavra curse on Harry, he orders Narcissa to make sure Harry is dead. Narcissa whispers to Harry, "Is Draco alive?" She lies to the Dark Lord to protect Harry for an entirely maternal reason.

Speaking of protection, what about that scene just before the Battle of Hogwarts where Harry tells Ginny, whom he apparently loves, to stay safe in the Room of Requirement? He doesn't object to any of her brothers fighting, but he doesn't think she should be allowed to make her own choices about going into dangerous situations.

In fact, the reason Ginny barely appears in The Deathly Hallows is that Harry breaks up with her to protect her. He doesn't want her to be kidnapped and used as leverage against him, so he unilaterally calls off the relationship, refusing to listen to Ginny's protestations that she can look out for herself. Notice that his concern for her is in reference to himself, as if the events in her life are entirely contingent on him. (Remember, too, that Ginny spent books idolizing Harry without him paying any attention to her, except as a thrall of Tom Riddle he had to save—a prize, in other words.)

Not even beloved Hermione escapes untarnished. She has carried Harry and Ron through seven books—ask yourself how much Harry would have accomplished if he didn't have the benefit of her superior ability, knowledge, and insight. Yet she is a subordinate. The book isn't titled Hermione Granger and the Deathly Hallows.

And what does Hermione end up doing with her life? Using her ridiculously strong magical talents to go on her own adventures, saving the world and generally being the legendary witch she could be? No—she marries Ron, settles down, takes a desk job at the Ministry, and has 2.5 children. That's fine if it's what makes her happy, but I can't help feeling like it's a straightjacket holding down a truly brilliant woman.

There are strong and vibrant women in the Harry Potter series. Sadly, though, all too many seem to inhabit normative, individuality-sapping, agency-free support roles: wife, mother, subordinate.

Who is speaking in "Girl"? What do we know about him/ her?

Jamaica Kincaid's story "Girl" is a short story--a conversation between the main speaker (presumably a mother or mother-like figure) and the "girl" of the title, who we can infer is the main speaker's daughter. Most of the words of the story are dialogue spoken by the mother to the girl, and consist of instructions on proper behavior and the best way to complete chores and errands as an adult married woman.  

Readers can (and, indeed, are forced to) make several inferences about the speaker and her daughter. First, where do they live? We can guess, based on the dishes like "pepper pot" and "doukona" that they live in the West Indies. It's the kind of place where you grow your own okra and leave your wash to dry on the stone heap or the line. It could even be the island Antigua, where Kincaid herself grew up, if we read the story as partially autobiographical. 

Additionally, we can infer that the mother is somewhat between worlds, and her daughter will be too. Take, for example, religion. Though the daughter attends Sunday school, suggesting they are a Christian family, the mother also makes references to traditional Obeah practices as well. Obeah (or Voodoo or Ju-Ju or several other names) is the belief and practice of using supernatural beings to cause harm or mischief in the human world. The mother's instruction that the girl not "pick people's flowers— [she] might catch something" and that she avoid throwing stones at blackbirds, "because it might not be a blackbird at all" suggest that she holds Obeah beliefs in addition to Christian ones. This suggests that the family is, like many West Indies families, caught between ancestral beliefs and the beliefs of the European colonizers. 

We can also infer the mother's complex feelings towards her daughter. The fact the she is giving all these instructions implies that she wants her daughter to grow up to be a proper lady: she teaches her to set a classy table, sew and iron neatly, even how to walk like a lady. Still, her tone seems overly negative and even harsh, particularly the critiques that involve calling the girl a slut:

"this is how to behave in the presence of men you don't know very well, and this way they won't recognize immediately the slut I have warned you against becoming." 

As harsh as that sounds, though, the mother's ultimate goal seems to be setting the girl up to successfully navigate the world, which is appears to be distinctly patriarchal. The mother seems to understand that in order for her female child to succeed, she needs to be perceived as sexually virtuous and ladylike: she can't squat down to play marbles, or talk to "wharf-rat boys" or have a hanging hem. Whether she actually is sexually virtuous seems less important to the mother, who also teaches her how to brew medicine to abort an unwanted child. As critical as she is, it does seem that the mother loves her daughter and wants her to grow up fully equipped to survive in the world.

What's the common ratio for 4, 12, 36, 108, ... ?

The term common ratio in this question refers to the number which is the ratio between two numbers of a geometric sequence. 

There are two ways of finding the common ratio of a geometric sequence: (1) The first one is to divide the number and the number after it. That is, in this question we have:

4, as the first number and 12 the number after it. Then, 12/4 = 3. The same also with 12 and 36, that is 36/12 = 3. Therefore, the common ratio is 3.

(2) Now, we go the next method of finding the common ratio of a geometric sequence which is by the use of the formula in geometric sequence. The formula is:

`t=ar^(n-1)`

By the formula, we determine first the first term a, which is 4, the last term t, which is 108 and the number n which is the number of the last term in the sequence. Then, we solve for the ratio.

`108=4r^(4-1)` 

`108=4r^(3)`  divide both sides by 4, we have

`27=r^(3)` Get the cube root of each side, it will become

`root(3)(27)=root(3)(r^(3))`  and finally, we have

3=r or simply r=3.

Therefore, the common ratio is 3. 

What rebuke does Jeth receive when he casually refers to the president as "old Abe"?

In Chapter 4, Jethro's mother is so shaken after reading Tom's letter that she sends Jethro over to spend the evening with Shadrach Yale (Shad).

Shad is the local schoolteacher, and definitely a hero to Jethro. Upon hearing that he may get to spend the night with his favorite teacher, Jethro is ecstatic. He doesn't think too much about walking the mile to Shad's log cabin, which adjoins the schoolroom. When he gets there, Jethro tells Shad that his mother has sent along a loaf of fresh, white bread. Shad is grateful, telling Jeth that the bread will go nicely with the chicken he's roasting.

Shad and Jeth talk about many things, among them, Shad's desire to marry Jenny, Jeth's fourteen year old sister. As Shad is only twenty, Jeth's father isn't too keen on the marriage. Also, Shad is making preparations to go to war. As Shad and Jeth converse, Shad teaches his student about battlefield logistics and warfare. Jeth finds the conversation especially invigorating until the moment he addresses Abraham Lincoln as Ol' Abe. The text tells us that Shad's response is just a quiet "Mr.Lincoln, Jeth."

However, Jeth obviously thinks of this as a rebuke presumably because he feels that his faux pas (blunder) has lowered himself in his idol's estimation. However, like the consummate teacher that he is, Shad merely continues in conversation with Jeth, acting as if Jeth never made the unintended error. Shad never embarrasses Jeth, and we can clearly see why Jeth idolizes Shad.

How do I write a monologue for the "doctor" character in Shakespeare's Macbeth?

If you were to write a monologue from the doctor's perspective, it would be vital to include his most important insights. These insights come when he first observes Lady Macbeth to be sleepwalking in Act 5, Scene 1.  He has come at the request of her gentlewoman who has seen her repeating the same disturbing motions and the same disturbing words for many nights now. 

Having heard Lady Macbeth ask, "who would have thought the old man / to have so much in him?" and "The Thane of Fife had a wife.  Where is / she now?  What, will these hands ne'er be clean?" he realizes that her "heart is sorely charged"  (5.1.41-42, 44-45, 56-57).  It does not take a doctor to gather that Lady Macbeth has some terrible weight on her conscience; her gentlewoman has already ascertained as much.  The doctor realizes that "This disease is beyond [his] practice" (5.1.62).  In other words, he knows that Lady Macbeth does not require a physician, as it is not a physical ailment from which she suffers; she could make better use of a priest because her trouble is clearly spiritual.  Moreover, the doctor says that "Unnatural deeds / do breed unnatural troubles.  Infected minds / to their deaf pillows will discharge their secrets" (5.1.75-77).  He recognizes that the only thing that could have distressed her so greatly is something that goes strongly against her conscience because people who are disturbed by these kinds of troubles will always talk in their sleep.  Any monologue of the doctor's should absolutely make reference to all of these revelations.

Why do we call the pairs of chromosomes homologous?

In diploid organisms, such as human beings, half of the chromosomes come from the mother (one parent) and the other half come from the father (the second parent). In a given set of chromosomes, the two chromosomes are similar to each other and hence the pair is called homologous and the chromosomes are called homologous chromosomes or homologs. In a homologous pair, each of the two chromosomes are similar, but are not identical. These two chromosomes contain the same gene in the same order and they pair up during the reproduction process of meiosis. In case of human beings, we have 22 pairs of homologous chromosomes. The 23rd pair is what determines the sex of the offspring (and could be homologous) and may contain similar chromosomes (xx, indicating a female offspring) or different chromosomes (xy, indicating a male offspring).

Hope this helps.